Fordham Law Professor Atinuke Adediran—who writes about business, law, and society—says in this Bloomberg Law op-ed that Big Law firms helping the Trump administration negotiate tariffs pro bono is a violation of legal ethics and the rule of law.
Big Law firms helping the Trump administration negotiate tariff terms pro bono would be antithetical to the purpose of pro bono practice.
President Donald Trump has targeted major law firms who represented his adversaries, challenged actions he favors, investigated his first administration, or employ lawyers who have been critical of him. Some of these executive orders take sweeping actions, such as threatening their government contracts, stripping lawyers of security clearances, and banning them from federal government buildings.
Firms that have fought back have won early victories, securing temporary restraining orders on the sanctions stopping themselves and other firms from continuing their work.
Those firms that haven’t pushed back, opting instead to cut a deal with the White House to relieve the pressure, are on the hook to provide pro bono legal services in a historic quid pro quo.
So far, firms have committed at least $940 million in deals with the White House, and that figure could continue to rise. The law firms making these deals said they would be advocating for causes such as “combating antisemitism,” supporting veterans, and “ensuring fairness” in the justice system.
…
As an example of this ability to pivot, Trump has floated the idea of enlisting law firms to use some of those millions of pro bono dollars for tariff negotiations with the many countries with tariffs of 10% or higher.
This is simply unacceptable. The American Bar Association establishes lawyers’ professional responsibility to provide pro bono legal services. Often, and as the ABA rules make clear, lawyers should provide pro bono legal services to those who otherwise can’t afford to pay for legal services. If lawyers provide pro bono legal services to government entities in furtherance of their organizational purposes, it should be under circumstances in which legal fees are “otherwise inappropriate.”
Read “Law Firms’ Quid Pro Quo Pro Bono Work on Tariffs Is Unethical” in Bloomberg Law.
